Mexico weekly ledger., 1887-03-03

y hAsF wv ~
case was tried and a verdict found
for the defendant. Afterwards a
plea in abatement was filed to the
other a to which plea a demurrer
was sustained. Book z, page 1876
On February 1ltb, 1856, this case
was tried and defendant found guilty
and fined $40. A motion for a new
trial was filed by Geo. Robertson,
attorney for defendant. This motion
was not determined at that term. The
motion was not docketed at the June
term. 1t was docketed at the Oeto-
Der term but not passed upon. From
the attached statement OF Judge
Robinson it appears that the motion
for a new trial was not passed upon
at the January term for the reason
that the attorneys for the State ana
defendant agreed to prepare n
submit briefs on the questions IN
volved. They did not do so and the
case not being docketed at the June
term, the motion passed out OF his
recollection. The attached state
ment of the Circuit Clerk shows that
the failure to docket the cast at the
June term was an accidental omls-
sion of his own. Judge Robinson's
statement also shows that the motion
was overlooked at the October term.
His attention was called to it after
adjournment of court, but too late to
take any action. The records fail to
show that Geo. Robertson represented
the State in any manner IN this case.
5th The jury reports: sin the case OF
State VS.. T. B. Martin indicted at
October term 1885, in nineteen couEts
a stay of execution was issued at the
; June term Sc. We find no further rec
ord of it."
June 18th, 1886, p, $50, motion
was filed by defendant to stay exe-
cution. From the statements it APP
pears that defendant insisted that I'M
der an agreement with Mr.. Buckner,
the prosecuting attorney, made at
the January term 1886, the execu-
tons should be p~erpetually stayed.
l The purpose of these motions was to
determine whether any such agree
r ment had been made. These mo-
lions are still pending and executions
cannot issue until they are determin-
ed.
9th The jury reports: "that in the case
: of State VS.. ". H. Logan, at October
, term, 1886. indicted for selling liquor
in violation of the druggists act of
1883, on ten counts, l to 10, inclu-
| sive, that the defendant appeared and
plead guilty to counts l to 2 end a
, fine of $50 assessed instead of 5000,
2 which would seem to be the lowest
penalty, according to session acts
of 1888, sec. 2, page 90, and that
; counts 8, 4, 5, G., Z, s. 8 and 10 were
] dismissed at defendants costs"
Y The record and back of the
q indictment both chow that de.
. PENDANT was charged with selling liz,
uor without license as also does the
e the Judges docket, though the in.
f dictment was for selling liquor as 9
n druggist. 1t also appears that while
= there were ten indictments there were
only the names of four witnesses
edorsed thereon.
y We file with our report statements
!, made by Judge L. Robinson, Geo.
e Robertson, Esq, and S. B. Cook, Esq
q The committee sat openly, the day OF
:, sitting having been published in the pa
pers. At the request of the gentlemen
t implicated in the report certain per
sons had been requested to give any
z information in their possession not
y appearing of record and all though
our examination personspresent were
requested to furnish any information
n in their possession. The records
d and the facts learned from the above
mentioned persons, contain all The
facts before US, and we suppose al
the facts that could be elected on
trial are contained in this report. w
Ie might well end our report here pre-
Ie suming upon the knowledge of the
u court of the law and rules of practice
but inasmuch as we have been calico
'r upon to make the examination, we
may not be deemed Prescriptions by
lie the court to make a few suggestions
J. To persons not conversant with The
q practice OF the courts, and unfamil,
lar with the law, we suppose the re-
port Of the grand jury would show
what might be construed into lrregu
l~arilies, possibly corruption, in the
following particulars.
1st. Permitting a defendant
g charged with anumber of misdemean'
ors to plead guilty of some and have
the others dismissed upon payment
n of costs.
b End. Allowing a defendant to
plead guilty to selling liquor without
license, when indicted for selling
liquor as a druggist.
3rd. For an attorney to continue
the defense of a client after appoint.
ment as prosecuting attorney.
0 4th. For a prosecuting attorney
to collect and receipt for a fine or any
u part of it.
9Th. For a court to enter a stay
of execution for an indefinite time.
n depending upon the good behavior OF
5 the defendant.
AS to the first the practice has
, been recognized and followed in the
Circuit Court Of this county since its
d organization, and there has scarcely
been a court held in which the
: records will not show cases so dispos.
q ed of. Generally, for misdemeanors,
o such as selling liquor without license,
the prosecuting attorney has more in
dictments found than he expects tc
be able to prosecute to a successful
termination. The result is considered
, pooI yhap ora half or n IesC pro,nr